TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Electronic Review From:Sue Ellen Adkins <sea -at- NETCOM -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 7 Dec 1995 15:22:56 -0800
Tom Kolano wrote:
> Clearly, there are advantages to eliminating paper in such a
> process.
> However, in grad school we were made aware of studies
> which demonstrated that electronic copy was much more straining
> and tiring to read than hard copy. Unfortunately, I do not
> remember the authors of these studies, but I agree with
> the conclusion from my own experience. Isn't this still an
> accepted tenet? I prefer reading paper copy, and would
> probably insist on the same as the reviewers above.
I prefer to edit and review documents on paper rather than on the monitor.
It's easier to read paper documents (more dpi than on the monitor). Online
reviewing doesn't allow me to flip back and forth between pages to compare
paragraphs. When I review paper documents, I move away from the computer, lean
back in the chair, and rest my feet on an opened bottom drawer of my desk. I
like to believe that this change of position is helping me avoid repetitive
stress injuries.
